19 - 1Jn 2:9-11
Ὁ λέγων ἐν τῷ φωτὶ εἶναι, καὶ τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ μισῶν, ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ ἐστὶν ἕως ἄρτι. Ὁ ἀγαπῶν τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ, ἐν τῷ φωτὶ μένει, καὶ σκάνδαλον ἐν αὐτῷ οὐκ ἔστιν· ὁ δὲ μισῶν τὸν ἀδελφὸν αὐτοῦ‚ ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ ἐστὶ, καὶ ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ περιπατεῖ, καὶ οὐκ οἶδε ποῦ ὑπὰγει, ὃτι ἡ σκοτία ἐτύφλωσε τοὺς ὀφθαλμοὺς αὐτοῦ. The two verses just expounded correspond, in their relation to the whole, with the third verse of the chapter: in both cases the matter of the sub-section is summed up compendiously and placed at the head. The following verses, from 1Jn 2:7-9, correspond, on the one hand, to1Jn 2:4-5within our second section; while, on the other hand, they run parallel with 1Jn 1:8-10. The thought presented in the preceding words is now elucidated; but in the genuine Johannaean style, that of bringing out into prominence the constituent elements involved in the ideas themselves. We might well wonder that the apostle, after he had preparatively spoken of brotherly love with such solemn and plain emphasis, should now descend to the terseness of simple dialectical disquisition about it. But it is precisely here, where he has set the supreme beauty of brotherly love before his readers in the preceding words, that he now, with inexorable logic, asks the question, Art thou of God or not? Hast thou attained thisgoal or not? The former of the verses is here also negative, as we have found to be the case always. He who saith that he is in the light—the expression is occasioned by the words going just before, τὸφῶςἤδηφαίνει [“the light is already shining”]—and doesnotlove: this is the first supposition. Fellowship with God, and with God as light, is ever the final goal of all the apostle’s exhortations: hence this is placed here in the foreground. But here this fellowship is only asserted: in very fact there is, hatred instead. The formal negation,μὴἀγαπᾶν [“do not love”], is displaced in favour of the full positive expressionμένειν [“to abide”].Tertium non datur. Particularly in the case of brethren, and in relation to them,—for that is the question here,—indifference is utterly impossible. We may indeed speak in common life of inclinations and dislikes, but these are really nothing but stages of love or hatred not yet come to their full development or into clear consciousness. Indeed, the apostle does not speak of hatred in general, but of the most fearful and unnatural hatred: that which has our brethren for its object. The expression may refer to theπλησίον [“neighbour”], to every man; but also specifically to those whowith us are members of the body of Christ. Now, as the apostle in what precedes had been exhorting us so to love as Jesus loved; as he almost expressly reminds us of the feet-washing, and this, we know, referred, like the whole section of the Gospelin which theἐντολὴκαινή [“new commandment”]is the subject (John 13:1-38, John 14:1-31, John 15:1-27, John 16:1-33, John 17:1-26), to the disciples of Jesus in the strictestsense, we are constrained to limit the term “brethren”to the inmost circle of the Christian discipleship. But we should expect here, as parallel with the corresponding verse of the previous section, some such conclusion as ψεύστηςἐστίν [“is a liar”]. Instead of this, the apostle lays down here, with keen severity, the antithesis of the mere assertion of walking in the light ὁλέγων [“the one who says”] in the words τῇσκοτίᾳ ἐστὶνἕωςἄρτι [“is in the darkness until now”]. The last words evidently have the emphasis. Even yet: so much and so long as he nevertheless declares the contrary; or, probably with more correctness: even yet, although the true light already shines and the darkness is wearing away.
Now for the obverse of all this. He that loveth his brother—here also, as in 1Jn 1:9, the direct antithesis is not formally indicated, but to the feeling of the reader it is thereby all the more emphatic—abideth in the light. Assuredly this light is not kindled in him by brotherly love; but this latter is itself the result of the εἶναιἐντῷφωτὶ [“is in the light”]. But as, in the natural life, life itself is the condition of all living activities, and is then by these activities confirmed and strengthened, so it is in this case. Hence the expression μένειν [“to abide”]. By the side of this positive benediction of the ἀγαπᾶντοὺςἀδελφούς [“love of the brothers”] there runs a negative: σκάνδαλονἐν αὐτῷοὐκἔστιν [“no cause for stumbling in him”]. But the question, very difficult of decision, arises, whether the offence has for its object the ἀγαπᾶν [“love”] itself or the brethren,—that is, whether the believer has no occasion of his own sin in himself, or is not to be an occasion of sinning to his brother. There are weighty reasons on both sides. In favour of the former is the strong consideration, that throughout the whole section the subject is how every individual is to secure his own salvation, not how he may effect or influence his brethren’s. And this view of it would yield a good meaning. As all sin is egoism, he who in love walks as Christ walked has no longer any impulse of sin within him; every temptation to sin is restrained by the habitual stream of love from issuing in act. On the other hand, in favour of the second meaning is the consistent usage of the New Testament, which without exception regards σκάνδαλον [“cause for stumbling”] as the offence or cause of stumbling which may be put in the way of others. And when we reflect with what solemn earnestness our Lord, in St. Matthew and St. Luke, threatens those who are the cause of offence, it is evident that in fact there is a higher blessing in being exempt from cause of stumbling in our fellow-Christians. And with this agrees our experience, that lovelessness on our part is wont to occasion sin in others beyond anything else; and the doctrine of St. Peter, that we by well-doing, or by expressions of love, may stop the mouths of ignorant men. Consequently, we may well temporarily decide for this latter interpretation, without, however, being able positively to refute the other.
Just as in the second sub-section of the first section, the second of our present one also consists of three clauses; and the third (1Jn 2:11) is here, as there, more full and more forcible than the preceding ones. He that hateth his brother not only is in darkness,—that was also already in the μένει [“to abide”], of 1Jn 2:9, —but the darkness rules all the actions of his life, περιπατεῖ ἐν τῇσκοτίᾳ [“walk in darkness”]; and, forsooth, as his way is wrapped in darkness, his goal also is hidden from him, οὐκ οἶδε ποῦ ὑπάγει. Now, when a verb of motion like ὑπάγειν [“going”] is connected with a ποῦ [“where”], that is, with an adverb of rest, corresponding to ἐν [“in”] with a dative, two points are made emphatic: as well the movement to an end as also the result of it. And what is the goal to which the hating man moves without knowing it? Generally, it is quite right to explain that he knows not to what a depth of sinful ruin he may be driven down by means of his hatred. But it is simpler and more exact to take the σκοτία [“darkness”] itself as his goal. The persons in question say, and that without conscious hypocrisy, that they are in the light; and precisely through this ignorance as to their own condition, as to the way in which they are found, they are blinded also as to the goal, which is again no other than darkness. And how comes it that they so absolutely know not this sure end of all? The same darkness hath blinded their eyes. Ὀφθαλμοὺς [“eyes”] is not the “natural power of apprehension,” the intellectual eye in the ordinary sense; but in the New Testament style it is the organ by means of which man becomes susceptible to the powers of light and dark ness compassing him about, this being altogether distinct from the mere understanding. According as it is determined in its function by the one or the other, is the whole man light or darkness. Finally, let us not fail to observe the progression in the last three verses: 1Jn 2:9 has only one predicate in the conclusion, 1Jn 2:10 has two, 1Jn 2:11 three.